Poker Bill to be introduced today

[jetset]

WEXLER'S POKER BILL DETAILED

Florida representative to launch proposal to exempt poker from UIGEA this week

A much anticipated bill designed to exempt poker and other games of skill from the provisions of the anti-online gambling Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act will be introduced this week by Florida Congressman Robert A. Wexler.

Wexler is a Democrat who wants to carve out "skill games" such as online poker, bridge, chess and mahjong from the online gambling prohibition, which forbids financial transactions with online gambling companies.

Describing the new bill, Wexler spokesperson Josh Rogin said: "It allows Americans to play poker online as they should have every right to do."

Wexler's bill will be unveiled the day before the House Financial Services Committee is scheduled to hold a hearing on the subject (see previous InfoPowa reports) at the behest of Congressman Barney Frank, the committee chairman and an outspoken critic of the online gambling ban.

The subject of Friday's hearing will be legislation Frank introduced that would regulate and license online gambling in the United States. Rogin said Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat, is also supportive of Wexler's bill.

[Rusty]

WEXLER'S POKER BILL DETAILED

Florida representative to launch proposal to exempt poker from UIGEA this week

A much anticipated bill designed to exempt poker and other games of skill from the provisions of the anti-online gambling Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act will be introduced this week by Florida Congressman Robert A. Wexler.

Wexler is a Democrat who wants to carve out "skill games" such as online poker, bridge, chess and mahjong from the online gambling prohibition, which forbids financial transactions with online gambling companies.

Describing the new bill, Wexler spokesperson Josh Rogin said: "It allows Americans to play poker online as they should have every right to do."

Wexler's bill will be unveiled the day before the House Financial Services Committee is scheduled to hold a hearing on the subject (see previous InfoPowa reports) at the behest of Congressman Barney Frank, the committee chairman and an outspoken critic of the online gambling ban.

The subject of Friday's hearing will be legislation Frank introduced that would regulate and license online gambling in the United States. Rogin said Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat, is also supportive of Wexler's bill.

That is interesting news but my uneducated guess would be he will have an uphill stuggle although I would be very interested to see who was on that regulatory board.
Also I seem to remember a court case where the issue was whether Poker was a game of skill or chance.
In the end I think the verdict was that there was not enough evidence to support that skill was a greater factor than chance.
My memory is sketchy about the details but maybe this will be used as some kind of precedent to kill the bill.

[lots0]

Also I seem to remember a court case where the issue was whether Poker was a game of skill or chance.

Ya I remember that too. But I believe that the court case you are referring to was in Snaresbrook Crown Court, UK, so it will have no effect whatsoever on the US Legislation.

And I believe that the Jury in that case decided that Poker was a Game that was dominated by Skill, but that chance (luck) played a major roll in the game.

As far as I know the Legal question of Chance vs. Skill in Poker has yet to be decided by any court in the English speaking world.


<added>
But I think any serious Poker Player can tell you, it is a game of Skill, no doubt about it.
If it were a game of Luck, I would win some money once in a while...
</added>

[Rusty]

Ya I remember that too. But I believe that the court case you are referring to was in Snaresbrook Crown Court, UK, so it will have no effect whatsoever on the US Legislation.

And I believe that the Jury in that case decided that Poker was a Game that was dominated by Skill, but that chance (luck) played a major roll in the game.

As far as I know the Legal question of Chance vs. Skill in Poker has yet to be decided by any court in the English speaking world.


<added>
But I think any serious Poker Player can tell you, it is a game of Skill, no doubt about it.
If it were a game of Luck, I would win some money once in a while...
</added>

Ahh thank you Lotso, so it was in the UK.
I am not sure how something can be dominated by one aspect while the opposite aspect still plays a major role?
That makes no sense to me but maybe it does to other people?
As you say it is a game of skill but then again it is a game of chance
Certainly skill plays a part but I think the problem is defining where skill starts and chance ends.
After all you could have the best player in the world play against the worse player in the world in heads up and assuming the no hoper went all in every hand preflop the pro would eventualy have to call.
Now certainly the odds are that the pro would have the best preflop hand but it is by no means a certainty and even if he did have the best hand he probably would not be a massive favourite.
I know I am giving a simplistic example and there are more aspects to the game but if a total beginner has a reasonable chance of beating a World champion heads up then it is difficult to argue that chance does not play a significant part in NL holdem.
Thanks very much for the info

[dominique]

At this juncture, the more bills are introduced, the more attention it gets, and the more bills will be introduced.

The more the merrier I say, the attention is good. The worst case scenario is that no one cares and no bills are introduced.

[lots0]

The argument I remember from that case in the UK is that Chance was in the shuffle and the Skill began when the player started using strategy to play the hand.

As for your heads up example, I believe the Pro would walk away with all the chips.

The ability to calculate the odds and the outs is a learned skill (in land based games the skill set expands to include reading people, their facial expressions, body language, voice tenor and interpreting what they all mean) and if you don't have those skill sets, anyone that does have them is going to take your chips away...

In my opinion, the only way a Pro would lose in the above scenario is if he/she made a major mistake and that makes it skill IMO.

The best hand often does not win the chips, but the best player always does, IMO.

At this juncture, the more bills are introduced, the more attention it gets, and the more bills will be introduced. The more the merrier I say, the attention is good.

I could not agree more.

[Rusty]

The argument I remember from that case in the UK is that Chance was in the shuffle and the Skill began when the player started using strategy to play the hand.

Now that is a very interesting perspective and I would never have thought of looking at it in that way.
I pretty much agree with everything else you say and I would never argue that skill is not important but try to look at it another way.
If you have 6 players all of roughly equal ability then any one will come last and any one will come first and the deciding factor will be luck not skill.
If a bookmaker were to offer me odds on a major tournament final table where all the players had equal chips it would be wise to back the outsider every time.
That is what makes the game so compelling for people you always feel like your skill could be the deciding factor and when you win you are sure it is but when you lose it is usually Lady luck that kicks your ass.
It is just a matter of interpretation.

[lots0]

That is what makes the game so compelling for people you always feel like your skill could be the deciding factor and when you win you are sure it is but when you lose it is usually Lady luck that kicks your ass.

LOL
I don't know about everyone else, but I figure that if chance (luck) were involved, I would walk away from a table once in while with some of my money (and maybe someone else's as well) in my pocket, but as that almost never happens... I have to say that chance has very little to do with it.